Law enforcement slams concealed gun bill

This is a discussion on Law enforcement slams concealed gun bill within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; By PAUL DAVENPORT/Associated Press
PHOENIX - Law enforcement officials on Thursday said public safety would be put at risk by proposed legislation that would allow ...

Law enforcement slams concealed gun bill

By PAUL DAVENPORT/Associated Press

PHOENIX - Law enforcement officials on Thursday said public safety would be put at risk by proposed legislation that would allow Arizonans to carry concealed weapons without state permits and allow those with permits to take concealed weapons to schools when picking up and dropping off students.

State Sen. Sylvia Allen, the bill's sponsor, said public safety would be enhanced, not diminished, if her bill becomes law, particularly in the state's urban areas.

One of several gun-rights measures advancing in the Legislature, the bill would replace the current misdemeanor for carrying a concealed weapon without a permit, with one prohibiting use of a concealed weapon for violent or other serious crimes.

The bill (SB170) proposed by Allen of Snowflake and 21 other Republican lawmakers is scheduled to be considered today during a special meeting by the Senate Judiciary Committee as part of a crush of bills now being considered in the wake of legislative approval of a new state budget.

State Attorney General Terry Goddard and a dozen county and municipal law enforcement officials said the lack of now-required permit training could heighten tension in everyday situations. The training includes advising that permit-holders announce possession of a concealed weapon during police encounters, officials said.

If the bill becomes law, officers ‘‘have to treat every single person that they come in contact with as armed and dangerous,'' said Jack Harris, Phoenix public safety manager.

Allen scoffed at that argument, saying that criminals will continue to carry concealed weapons, with or without a permit. She said she is sponsoring the bill because residents have a right to defend themselves and shouldn't have to put up with burdensome permit requirements.

‘‘This is to protect our citizens,'' she said.

Allen said she would never suggest that people not get the now-required training on firearms law and testing for familiarity and accuracy of an applicant's weapons use, but that it shouldn't be a state requirement.

The state constitution provides a right dating from statehood in 1912 to bear arms for defense, and it's legal in Arizona to carry a gun openly, as in a hip holster.

A state law from 1994 allowed residents 21 and older to carry a gun concealed if they get a state permit, which Goddard called ‘‘a special privilege.''

You gain strength, courage, and confidence by every experience in which you really stop to look fear in the face. You are able to say to yourself, "I have lived through this horror. I can take the next thing that comes along." . . . You must do the thing you think you cannot do. Eleanor Roosevelt

...Allen scoffed at that argument, saying that criminals will continue to carry concealed weapons, with or without a permit. She said she is sponsoring the bill because residents have a right to defend themselves and shouldn't have to put up with burdensome permit requirements.

‘‘This is to protect our citizens,'' she said...

This is what it's all about. It doesn't effect the rights of 'criminals' in any way...laws never have!

Allen scoffed at that argument, saying that criminals will continue to carry concealed weapons, with or without a permit. She said she is sponsoring the bill because residents have a right to defend themselves and shouldn't have to put up with burdensome permit requirements.

The title of the thread is misleading. It should read, "Police Chiefs, Sheriff's, and other spineless politicians slam...". I would be willing to bet you that the vast majority of street cops/deputies/agents in AZ strongly support the bill.
Gonzo

The title of the thread is misleading. It should read, "Police Chiefs, Sheriff's, and other spineless politicians slam...". I would be willing to bet you that the vast majority of street cops/deputies/agents in AZ strongly support the bill.
Gonzo

I agree with you,.. That is the media for you.. Anyone know if this passes or not,.. From what I read it should be voted on today?? Or did I read it wrong?

"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined". - Patrick Henry

There are some who see no difference. There are others who believe that the above is not true. They are wrong because the SCOTUS has stated this in an opinion (I forget which one).

It doesn't even matter if you (or "they") disagree with the SCOTUS. The fact is, this is the law and a personal disagreement with it won't change that fact. So, NO you DO NOT have a right to bear arms in a concealed manner.

There are some who see no difference. There are others who believe that the above is not true. They are wrong because the SCOTUS has stated this in an opinion (I forget which one).

It doesn't even matter if you (or "they") disagree with the SCOTUS. The fact is, this is the law and a personal disagreement with it won't change that fact. So, NO you DO NOT have a right to bear arms in a concealed manner.

The constitution was not written to give you rights it was written to define what rights a person has just by existing.The second says the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. it does not define how you bear those arms.
That said I am not at this point willing to kill and/or go to prison standing up for that belief but I do believe it exist.

It has been said,.. When the 2nd Amendment was written, they didn't need to put something in there that was already known... Do you ever remember seeing a picture of them with holsters strapped round there coats that they wore back then? They all carried side arms and they was carried under the coats,.. Hence -- concealed,. Because people are so legalistic on everything these days, just because they didn't say.. "Right to bear arms concealed on your person or in your glovebox or under your seat" you have to think about the times,.. Horseback, common dress was long coats, and long dress coats (suits with tails) under them.. they could have concealed AR's and AK's under they're coats without anyone knowing (if they was made back then).... Oh, and they all carried long guns in the sheaths on the horses too,.. So we all should be able to carry long guns in our car's, trucks, and motorcycles... I can just think about it,. A mount for my AR on my Harley,.... ((((( mental picture )))))

This is the usual reaction among law enforcement and citizens alike when such legislation is considered. I know local law enforcement here was not too happy when the previous governor signed into law the carry bill here in Alaska. There was much confusion over carrying concealed without a permit in the more populated areas, but it has for the most part been cleared up, no municipality or town may pass laws that are stricter than state law.

People were under the impression that citizens would start packing heat and shoot each other over parking spaces and other small things. Since its introduction in 2003 that has never happened. It has been an uphill battle to get to where we are now, and there is still much ground to cover when it comes to RKBA.

Someone needs to point out to the "officials" in Az that Alaska and Vermont aren't under a state of siege and they can carry concealed without a permit. Why would Arizona be any different.
Also, if a LEO doesn't assume everyone he encounters while on duty is armed, he's not doing his job right. This go's for shoplifters, traffic offenders, jaywalkers
EVERYONE!!!